The British Parliament voted NO to military assault on Syrian soil

The UK Parliament debated on Syria

The British Parliament voted out the use of military strike on Syria.  89% of people in the UK oppose or are neutral about bombing Syria.  The US and France insist that they can deploy missiles at their commands. 

More than 150 members of the Congress demand the President for votes before any military attacks. The move is backed by more than 80% of the voters.

When there are reports saying Saudi Arabia supplied chemical weapons to Syrian rebels, it is not moral 'obscenity' that kills Muslims.  The military hawks' ambition in that part of the world is not justifiable, which has killed so many, civilians and the US soldiers alike.  The wars in Iraq and in Afghanistan show how we CANNOT rule the area by use of force. 

The Israeli now are trying to prepare possible attacks from around the globe.  The Russians sent out battle ships to the region.  Saudi Arabia is on alert.  The refugees flooded the border.  Jordan says no missiles will be launched from its soil.  Nations including Canada and Germany say no to bomb Syria. 

Why justify the use of forces?  Who sets the criteria for the use of forces?  The President has no mandate either from the Congress nor from the UN.  When that dictator is threatened of his life, the military threat would motivate him to abandon the use of forces.